Tech Boss Attacks 'Whiners' in Angry Email (bbc.com) 287
An anonymous reader shares a report: The co-founder of a Silicon Valley investment firm said it is "not my job to make you all feel good" in a long email to staff and investors. Jonathan Teo from Binary Capital was responding to negative press coverage about the firm following allegations of sexual harassment by his co-founder Justin Caldbeck. He added that he was "tired and indignant," and raged against "whiners" who demanded his attention. Mr Teo has already offered to resign. He did so after Mr Caldbeck left the firm in June. "I'm incredibly sorry," Mr Caldbeck tweeted when the news broke last month. Mr Caldbeck's actions were one of several sexism scandals to rock Silicon Valley in recent months. They include a damning report into the work culture inside ride-hailing firm Uber, and the resignation of venture capitalist Dave McClure, who admitted "inexcusable behaviour" towards "multiple women."
Read the TFA... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Read the TFA... (Score:4, Interesting)
A tech boss generally knows zilch about tech. Which is what is wrong with the entire venture capital system.
Re: (Score:2)
No amazon affiliate links to your favorite wines, cheeses, crackers, and noise-cancelling headphones, creimer?
According to Amazon, their number one best seller is the Cowin E-7 Active Noise Cancelling Wireless Bluetooth Over-ear Stereo Headphones [amzn.to] for $69.99 (list price is $199.99). Never tried them myself. YMMV.
But isn't he right? (Score:5, Insightful)
This guy isn't accused of doing anything wrong. The guy who *was* accused has resigned. Right?
So why is it this guy's job to constantly apologize for the actions of someone he had no control over and who has already been forced out of the firm? It's not his fucking fault his former partner was an asshole.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Obviously not. It directly falls on him, where else would it go? He was either ignorant of his business partner or accepting, either way, this certainly falls in his lap. Acting indignant later does not change this.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So why is it this guy's job to constantly apologize for the actions of someone he had no control over and who has already been forced out of the firm?
Because he's the CEO. That's exactly his job, along with a large dose of, "Here's how we're going to make sure this never, ever is permitted to happen again here...." And also to take care of his employees and clients and make them feel emotionally good about working there and investing with them. That's. His. Job.
And his outright hostility towards the notion of a woman filling his job, covered up under a pathetic excuse of "we need the best person period" platitude, shows he is as much of the problem
Re: (Score:2)
I'm betting the only thing keeping this place's funds open is lack of liquidity.
Anybody expecting rounds to be funded there in the future is going to face disappointment. Which will suck for those female clients that did 'suck'...you know there were some.
It's now just a holding company, while the process unwinds.
Re: (Score:2)
YES it IS your job to turn them in and apologize for their behavior and explain yourself.
Actually, in many jurisdictions, your legal obligations regarding your spouse (or even other close people) being prosecuted are more limited than in case of other people being prosecuted. More, not less, as you seem to suggest.
Re: (Score:2)
You're legally shielded from having to testify against them, but that doesn't change your moral or ethical responsibilities.
The reason the law is that was is because of abusive prosecutors, and only that. If you let lawyers go after the spouse, they'd do it every single damn time.
There is certainly a moral responsibility to take action if your spouse is a serial killer, though going to the authorities is perhaps not a clearly acceptable solution. What people expect you to do in that situation is not somethi
Re: (Score:2)
"I just found out" - All's cool you reported a murderer right away.
Otherwise you are an accomplice and yeah that needs lots of explanation if you want to avoid repercussions.
Re: (Score:2)
I would take carry the first part of your analysis into the second and say that if he's a partner he is responsible, and so if he's not "accepting any responsibility" then he is already doing whatever "it" is, as an accomplice and that he has in fact been caught out.
TL;DR version straight from TFA (Score:4, Insightful)
"If you were teaching PR 101 this guy has just done everything possible wrong. He has insulted clients, he has insulted investors, he has insulted employees and he has insulted the media.
Re:TL;DR version straight from TFA (Score:5, Funny)
Sounds like he's ready to become president of the United States.
Re: (Score:3)
Only after he's gone bankrupt too.
He needs to quit--immediately (Score:5, Insightful)
Sexual harassment isn't whining, it's a fucking legal issue.
If he can't deal with issues in his company he doesn't need to get permission to resign, he needs to stop whining himself and just fucking quit.
Did I just get teleported to the supermarket? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Haha, if you don't like the news then don't buy the National Enquirer!
If you don't like the news then don't buy People magazine!
It's too bad that bat boy isn't in the news anymore, none of the lamestream media ever bother covering bat boy.
Re: (Score:2)
BatBoy has an exclusive media deal with Weekly World News, if you want to read about his latest exploits that is the only place that is going to have a clear shot. It is the same as Spiderman and the Daily Bugle.
Re: (Score:2)
So that's a woosh for the doosh.
It is your job (Score:5, Insightful)
As the head of this company, it is his job to motivate employees. Otherwise known as "making them feel good".
This is yet another child with money.
Re:It is your job (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree that making employees feel good isn't an end in itself -- particularly making them feel good all the time. There are times when you,as boss, have to make certain employees feel bad. "Leadership" is just another word for "emotional manipulation".
That said, working under competent and effective leadership tends to lead to success and that tends to be rewarding for people. If everyone around you is worthless, the problem is almost certainly you.
After decades in business, I am heartily sick of put-upon managers. It's almost like bragging: despite my good-for-nothing employees, look at how I'm muddling through! And I always think, "why not hire better employees?" It's not that hard: pay a little more, choose a little more carefully, treat the good performers with respect and regularly clear out the deadwood. And yet, while I've met countless put-upon managers in my career, I can count on one hand the ones who made any kind of concerted, systematic effort to hire and retain the best people, and all of them were very successful.
The only conclusion I can make is that those armies of put-upon managers are actually more comfortable with dysfunction and mediocrity. Most bosses are their own worst enemies; which means as a group they're exactly like most other people, just in a better position to force their personal emotional drama on others.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that making employees feel good isn't an end in itself -- particularly making them feel good all the time. There are times when you,as boss, have to make certain employees feel bad. "Leadership" is just another word for "emotional manipulation".
That said, working under competent and effective leadership tends to lead to success and that tends to be rewarding for people. If everyone around you is worthless, the problem is almost certainly you.
Quite agree. But that doesn't make it your boss's job to make you "happy". Their job is to motivate you to get your work done - happy or not. Yes it is to their benefit to help keep your morale up, etc; but that's a matter of how they want to lead, and what kind of team/company/etc they want to have.
Companies tend to behave like their C-level execs. If those execs are back stabbers, distrusting, etc - it'll show all the way down; and it takes a long time for a new exec team that's not doing that to chang
Re: (Score:2)
Who do you think were implementing those 'everyone gets a trophy' policies? It wasn't the gen-y and millennials, they were the targets not the source.
True...it was primarily Baby Boomers acting out of the 1970's love fest, and following advice from people like Dr. Spock; people that themselves were part of the 1970's love fest and are a root of a lot of the issues in psychology today.
Yes people will tend to do better in a good environment. But that doesn't mean you cater to making them "happy". Happiness is not something that can be quantitatively defined; it is a qualitative subject and very subjective. What makes on person "happy" won't necessarily
"Don't Whine" (Score:2)
... he says. In the whiniest way possible.
Dumping David Bonderman was SO dumb.. (Score:2)
David Bonderman has made a career of succesfully turning around many failing companies. He has made billions buying struggling companies and re-working their operations and building them into successful companies. He's one of the few "good" venture capitalists out there who actually puts money to work rebuilding failing companies instead of just stripping their assets. He's one of the few people who could have figured out how to save Uber. He made one sarcastic comment and gets some controversy and he j
Re: (Score:2)
Do we need Uber? It has plenty of competition ready to step up with better leadship and higher ethical standards.
Honing his skill set. (Score:2)
"If you were teaching PR 101 this guy has just done everything possible wrong. He has insulted clients, he has insulted investors, he has insulted employees and he has insulted the media.
Next, he'll be running for President.
Hrmpph! (Score:2)
Welcome to the "wonder" world of business (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks to political correctness, you can't even comment about someone "looking nice" anymore without
being written up. Women, those wanting to climb the corporate ladder at any cost, will do ANYTHING to
get themselves "noticed", going so far as to make allegations against a coworker.
The problem with sexual harassment is that unless you have proof, it's a he said she said issue.
But, with the Gloria Allreds of the world waiting for a chance to pounce on a microphone & camera, and,
the media looking for another "juicy" story to help cover the 24/7 news cycle, it turns into a political circus.
I assume you're a guy. How often do you tell another guy that he's "looking nice"?
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks to political correctness, you can't even comment about someone "looking nice" anymore without
being written up. Women, [blah blah blah].
I assume you're a guy. How often do you tell another guy that he's "looking nice"?
When he wants to harass somebody for wearing cargo shorts, presumably.
Re: (Score:2)
Every now and then. And like with women, it's completely non-sexual. Women do it too.
Now try this one: how often do men run around in a professional context with their chests visible, or with codpieces, or in tight short pants, or with makeup? That sort of thing seems to be acceptable for women, but it is not acceptable for men. Double standard?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:He must be ugly (Score:5, Insightful)
As it should. A work place is a place where work happens. Bosses hitting on their subordinates shouldn't happen. It's toxic to a work culture. My company has very strong policies about sexual harassment, including a ban on anyone entering into a sexual relationship with a subordinate. While the latter isn't sexual harassment, it's terrible for morale, and can be incredibly disruptive.
Surely your an adult and you can keep your hands to yourself, and you tongue firmly planted in your mouth when it comes to sexual or even flirtatious comments. And if you are incapable of that, then I would suggest the problem is yours. I know damned few fucking women that come to work hoping their boss or the guy in the cubicle next to them hits on them
I mean, what the fuck is wrong with you people? Are you all incapable of actually holding down a job that involves working with women? Are you that emotionally-driven that you can't just do your goddamned job and treat your coworkers with dignity and respect? Whether it's sexual harassment, or any other kind of harassment, any boss who doesn't take that seriously is asking for goddamned trouble, up to and including costly lawsuits. If you can't keep it in your pants, literally or metaphorically, then a judge will make you.
Re: (Score:2)
My company has very strong policies about sexual harassment, including a ban on anyone entering into a sexual relationship with a subordinate.
No chance of this being abused... Exactly how does your company plan to prove sexual relationship? That sounds like a rule that is meant to express a policy but which is absolutely not enforcible and may, in fact, be against the law.
Most companies have a rule against moral turpitude [wikipedia.org] of which even the feds have had to repeal the section on "adultery".
Your work sounds
Re:He must be ugly (Score:4, Interesting)
And I know of at least three cases in the last five years of organizations I work with where the "down low" blew up in various unpleasant ways, one in which the Executive Director (non-profit) had a rather torrid affair with his secretary, leading to the nightmare situation of severe disruption, and ultimately forcing the Board to basically oust him and take control, though so far as I was concerned, they waited far too long, and should have forced the two of them to decide whether they wanted to remain with the organization.
Bully for the couple in question. I'm sure it can work, but there enough legal and organizational risks that in general, yes, I'd say my company policy would ban her from being his direct subordinate (or visa versa).
Re:He must be ugly (Score:5, Informative)
The reason for the rules very often arises from experience. The purely consensual no strings attached relationships do blow up and they do disrupt the workplace badly. When the don't blow up there is often accusations of nepotism or favoritism when the boss promotes the person in the sexual relationship than to the others in the group.
I've worked some places where some early relationships formed in the startup days (handful of people working in close quarters with zero free time to see anyone outside of work). Then you've got people in a relationship in relatively higher levels of power in the company. So I want to bitch about a persons behavior to my boss, except that they live together. It's hard to complain about that person to others in the company because they don't want to cause waves, and the whole thing is a minefield.
Re: (Score:2)
No chance of this being abused... Exactly how does your company plan to prove sexual relationship?
Usually, they don't have to. Once it's found out, people tend to be fairly honest about it, especially since the penalty is not being fired, but being transferred to another department so there's no conflict of interest. Even if a company fired a worker and then claimed it was for a sexual relationship that didn't happen, that would open them up to a pretty big lawsuit. That's why you don't hear of that sort of thing happening.
That sounds like a rule that is meant to express a policy but which is absolutely not enforcible and may, in fact, be against the law. Most companies have a rule against moral turpitude [wikipedia.org] of which even the feds have had to repeal the section on "adultery".
Most states are employment at will states. They don't have to "prove" anything, c
Re: (Score:2)
I knew a husband and wife team who kept their relationship on the down-low but she worked for him in all the companies they were employed at together. Your company would "ban" the guy from having sex with his wife FFS.
In other words, this man's ethical flaw was not sexual harassment, but nepotism. If they were married before they got those jobs, then there's little likelihood that he was able to use his position as her superior to coerce favors from her. But boy, I'd love to work on their team because I'm
Re: (Score:3)
including a ban on anyone entering into a sexual relationship with a subordinate. While the latter isn't sexual harassment, it's terrible for morale
I mean, what the fuck is wrong with you people? Are you all incapable of actually holding down a job that involves working with women? Are you that emotionally-driven that you can't just do your goddamned job and treat your coworkers with dignity and respect
It's funny that you first suggest that seeing people having a relationship is "terrible for morale" and then accuse others of being emotionally-driven. I'd rather think that Not My Fucking Business is the non-emotionally-driven to relationships of other people in any mature collective I'm in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:He must be ugly (Score:5, Insightful)
When a manager has a sexual relationship, or even an emotional affair, with a subordinate, it alters the workplace dynamic. People will inevitably see favoritism, whether it's fair or not, and the manager's response, either to actually show his lover favoritism, or to go to the opposite extreme and be hard on that person as a show of resolve and strength, all have implications. A good manager understands he isn't managing robots, but human beings, who take their cues from management.
That's not even talking about the fallout of a breakup, which can have legal implications. Frankly I view anyone in management having an affair with a subordinate as a form of employment suicide, and there isn't a lawyer or HR expert in the world that will say "Just tell your girlfriend's peers to mind their own business". They're going to put it on the same level of horrible idea as open bars at company functions. In the risk-assessment world, having affairs with your staff is just one big bad fucking idea.
That's why the very best policy is not to have affairs with subordinates, and it's why most modern policies either outright ban such relationships, or require that the subordinate move into another department so that they are no longer under the manager's direct supervision. My company is very small, so there aren't enough "departments" as it were, so it's pretty much an outright ban. If I want to have a relationship with one of my staff, one of us is going to have to resign.
Re: (Score:3)
That's why the very best policy is not to have affairs with subordinates, and it's why most modern policies either outright ban such relationships, or require that the subordinate move into another department so that they are no longer under the manager's direct supervision.
I think there's a less draconian option available, which I've seen be effective at several companies.
The policy should be to require that superiors who engage in a personal, and especially sexual, relationship with any subordinate have to report the relationship to HR. Though that's all that needs to be published in the employee handbook, HR policy should then be to take something like the following actions:
1. Establish a specific reporting channel for allegations of favoritism by the superior.
2. Inform th
Re: (Score:2)
No it is not okay, and what Bill Clinton (and heaven knows how many other presidents) have done is a classic example of an authority figure abusing their power for sexual favors.
Neither was it okay for the current POTUS to brag at one point that he could grab the genitals of any woman he wanted.
Re: (Score:2)
Did the person you're replying to top post?
Re: (Score:3)
Doubly so when it ends.
Re: (Score:2)
If I ran a company I would also forbid relationships between a boss and a subordinate. Terrible for morale as you say.
Outside of that employees flirting as is human nature and occasionally hooking up could be a good thing for morale, makes the place more lively and happy as long as all is done in good taste for the parties involved.
Re: (Score:2)
Until a love triangle forms... Even relationships between equals in a company can be problematic.
Re: (Score:2)
True. I think it's better to let adults handle it if it happens though, rather than put more too many rules in place. I'm reminded of what Jack Tramiel said when asked how he could do deals with Germans after having been in a concentration camp.
"You know," he once told me, "it's hard to believe it really happened. But it can happen again. In America. Americans like to make rules, and that scares me. If you have too many rules you get locked in a system. It's the system that says this one dies and that one d
Re: (Score:2)
I know damned few fucking women that come to work hoping their boss or the guy in the cubicle next to them hits on them
And I know damned few men who hit on their coworkers. Sometimes asking someone out for coffee or a drink is just a means of getting to know them better, possibly for the purpose of building an understanding that allows them to work together better.
I do, however, know men who've been accused of sexual harassment for doing just that.
Re:He must be ugly (Score:4, Informative)
There are no lack of workplace bullying lawsuits, and while I can't speak for every organization, the definition of harassment in our policies is pretty darned broad, and largely because our lawyers over the years have made it pretty clear that if a harassment lawsuit of any kind is delivered to our doorstep, we'd better be able to show that not only did we have policies in place to protect employees, but that they were enforced. Even the articles of incorporation and the shareholders agreement have language to force the removal of a director, which allows even members of the board to be held to account for violating company harassment policies.
Re:Let's retort. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the very idea of ascribing specific sexual behaviors to one gender is absurd, and utterly unfounded, and another example of how some posters on Slashdot seem to believe this bizarre notion that all women are whores and all men are testicle-driven morons.
My company's policy doesn't have gender specific language. It outright bans harassment, so it is irrelevant whether the harasser is a man or a woman, or the victim is a man or a woman. What counts is that the company will not tolerate the behavior, and that it has disciplinary mechanisms at its disposal up to and including termination of employment. Your myths about motivation are irrelevant, pretty much false, and would do the company know favors if it got called into court over a harassment lawsuit.
Let me ask you. Can you keep your feelings to yourself? Can you gently rebuff someone who comes on to you? Can you control your urges, get through the day, and not hit on coworkers?
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't help when this tripe [slashdot.org] is sitting at a +5.
Re: (Score:2)
Those are some pretty broad strokes you're painting with.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Let's retort. (Score:5, Funny)
Women want to lure men in to having sex with them. This is done for reasons of pecking order (and in this case it could result in economic benefit due to promotion) and/or a feeling of belonging somewhere and/or economic reasons and/or a desire (healthy or unhealthy) for attention. Women like workplace dating mostly because it allows them to almost entirely transcend class differences, which would be hard to do in their social circle outside work.
Yeah absolutely. That's what women do. They're just trying to catch me unawares and fall on my penis. If I'm not careful I've had 2 blowjobs before I make it out the parking lot and every time I pass by the copy machine there's a woman bent over it trying to get me to accidentally do it to her doggy style. I have to avoid elevators no matter what because they'll hit the emergency stop button and reverse gangbang me before they let me out on my floor.
It's horrible.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Let's retort. (Score:5, Funny)
So, are they hiring over there?
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly does any of this disprove what I said? In fact it confirms what I've been saying, that such behavior is toxic.
Re:He must be ugly (Score:5, Insightful)
But if, as society says I should, I suppress them it will cause physical illness and in many cases mental illness as well. I
Bullshit. There's nothing unhealthy about getting a grip and acting professionally. People do it all the time. It's called impulse control.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's long debunked psychobabble. The brain isn't a pressure cooker, and no, holding back your emotions is not only healthy, but pretty much a requirement of living among your fellow human beings. Those that lack impulse control are rightfully viewed as having some sort of emotional and/or cognitive defect.
I certainly have felt attraction to coworkers throughout my working life, and even where I wasn't married and thus had no significant other to betray, it just never felt appropriate to act on such feelin
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't emotion it is biology. So to answer your question...no. I cannot work around women without my body responding biologically. My blood pressure will go up. My hormones are going to kick in. My body will respond physiologically. How I respond to those impulses is up to me. But if, as society says I should, I suppress them it will cause physical illness and in many cases mental illness as well.
Does your cave come with electricity and broadband, or do you go down to the local town and beat each other over the head with sticks to fight for the only computer with dialup and electricity?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
About all I've learned from your post is that you are likely mentally ill, or at the very least severely emotionally retarded.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is when it's in a workplace setting. What might be appropriate at a nightclub or a bar isn't going to be appropriate in your 9-5 job. You're not being paid to hit on your coworkers, and they're not being paid to tolerate it. Social rules are built on context, so what is an appropriate action in one environment is a major faux pas in another; as in it's totally acceptable to defecate in a washroom, but totally unacceptable to do it on the sidewalk.
For christs sake, didn't you have parents to teach you
Re: (Score:2)
When a woman changes her hair. You're generally supposed to notice, say something nice. 'You changed your hair, it looks good' etc. They would certainly comment if you wore a new suit (for the first time in years?). Just be a little careful, _you_ are no judge of woman's hair. Complementing their 'new hairstyle' when they were up all night with puking kids if a faux paux. That one bit me. Watch and listen to the other women, they know.
BTW If a woman comes in with a new push-up bra, don't say 'nice tits',
Re:He must be ugly (Score:5, Insightful)
Ahh, Good old Victim Blaming.
Because women love all the media attention and judgments, putting their career at risk, just for a payday, that is probably less than a full year wage. Well worth loosing out on a career that you wanted to do all your life.
Re: (Score:2)
Culturally men need to initiate romantic relations. However in terms of work, this puts the woman in a bad spot, because if she shuts them down, either they may loose a good working relationship, or be in a position where they are powerless to avoid retribution.
The fact that they have legal standing, meaning if there is threat that they can bring up legal action, should put men who would try to do this, or even try to push the line.
They are sexual tensions, but we don't need to act on them.
Re: (Score:2)
Culturally men need to initiate romantic relations.
Well, there's your problem. That, of course, combined with some women either looking for a payday (e.g. making shit up) or being so full of themselves that every man who even glances in her direction must want her (e.g. imagining shit) can make it dangerous to even have women present in the workplace.
Admittedly, many (if not most) claims of harassment are legitimate, as most women with their head screwed on straight enough to land a job in the first place aren't that full of themselves. That, however, doe
Re: (Score:2)
Normally when someone makes allegations it is because they do feel victimized. Of course it is up to the courts to see if what they did happen was indeed wrong.
However it is way too easy to just say they are just over reacting, when there is a problem. When there is a Allegation, you need to take it seriously. Normally the people who get in trouble with this, during the investigation is due to many woman stating it is an issue, and not just one poorly phrase comment, or an accidental touch, but a histori
Re: (Score:2)
A dead body doesn't automatically mean there's a murder (hence autopsies to see if it was or natural causes) ...
You example about the dead body. You are stating that if they found a dead body and a person next too it. They will just take his word that he had nothing to do about it, and do no further investigation, and no autopsy. If there is an allegation or some evidence it should be investigated.
I don't understand how you come into your conclusion from the parent post regarding the dead body??? The parent only said there should be an autopsy and it does not matter if there was a person next to the body or what the person said. Your interpretation surprised me a lot...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yep, this is the new way to make up for the perceived pay-gap women claim they experience.
It's not a good time to be a guy...especially a white guy. Anyone can hang an accusation of racist, mysoginist, xyz-ist....and it will stick and often cost you as that you are guilty till proven innocent.
Sure, some of these cases ARE legit, but there are so many out there that are not.
Guys....you
Re: (Score:2)
This was ALWAYS good advice. ALWAYS.
Re: (Score:2)
> Do you honestly think that white guys have it worse in life than everyone else?
Do you honestly believe that white guys don't have their own difficulties and inconveniences in life?
Should everybody just shut up about their own frustrations as long as there's a single group out there that has it worse?
Re: (Score:3)
Nope, didn't say that...
Just saying that the category of "white guy" is the only one that people are completely, 101% free to disparage, and attack without impunity these days.
All over sexes, and races are protected classes from attack and disparagement....."the man" is always at fault these days.
The white man is very easy to blame these days for almost any given social ill
Re:He must be ugly (Score:5, Insightful)
It's also being viewed by a lot of women as a first-class ticket to unlimited media attention and a big fat legal payday.
Can you provide a few examples of women who claimed harassment, and received a payout that you feel was unjustified?
Re: (Score:3)
Conversely, how many payouts can you find that were justified?
Irrelevant. That fact that there were very few justified payouts has nothing to do with the fact that (so far) zero citations for unjustified payouts have been provided by people claiming that they are common.
Let's face facts, women are very good at playing the victim card.
Your zero examples say otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Your zero examples say otherwise.
So do yours.
And there's a bit of truth in what both of you have to say; a woman seeking a payday is more likely to pursue legal avenues even after the alleged harassment has been dealt with so you will find many more instances of that if you actually look. Most women (in my experience) just want to be treated like human beings and will only complain about conditions when they're not; and once the situation has been remedied, they're most likely to carry on like nothing happened. By and far, the ones who s
Re: (Score:3)
Your zero examples say otherwise.
So do yours.
Nonsense. So far what we have is zero evidence of any women getting paydays from allegation complaints, justifiable or not. Against that we have allegations that there are lots of unjustified paydays. It's on the maker of the claim to support it, not on the objectors to disprove it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: American Hicks trying to flirt = sexual harass (Score:2)
I'd imagine that most strippers and Hooters waitresses would disagree with this statement.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're not able to find time to flirt outside of work then maybe shorten your work hours. Don't they have weekends in your part of the country?
Re:Recipe for success (Score:4, Insightful)
Or, you know, just keep it in your pants like an adult. I have worked for most of my life with women, some as bosses and supervisors, some as equals, and some as subordinates, and I've never had any issues at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Judging by the bitter, entitled comments here I can only imagine that many Slashdot posters are unable to get their sexual needs met, and thus are walking around in a constant state of sexual frustration.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I get hte impression here that many posters are stark raving terrified of women, and incredibly resentful. I imagine there are all sorts of interesting psychological reasons for these feelings, though I confess I can't quite understand them. As I said elsewhere, I've worked with women my entire working life; they've been my bosses, coworkers, and subordinates, and while I've seen my share of antisocial behavior, I never saw women having any great predilection for that kind of behavior than men. I get that w
Re: (Score:2)
If they have internet and still can't figure it out, there is no hope at all. They obviously wouldn't know what to do if their fantasies were available to them.
Re: (Score:3)
Or, you know, just keep it in your pants like an adult.
Wasn't that the "stay small" part?
Re: (Score:2)
Opinion stated as fact. Nice work. And regarding "not with a majority of the popular vote", give it up. You sound like a football coach complaining that his team lost the game despite gaining more rushing yards than their opponent.
Re:Many men feel emboldened now that Trump (Score:4, Funny)
But you have to say "not with the majority of the popular vote". That's because it makes Trump turn orange with anger. And when Trump turns orange with anger you get some very entertaining tweets at 3am. And entertaining tweets from the president at 3am keeps this economy running!
Re:Many men feel emboldened now that Trump (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh puhleese...
Trump's election does not change the generations long movement to political correctness that has taken over in the U.S.'s corporate culture.
Trump was NOT my choice for president & I am all for sexual equality and an end to harassment in the workplace.
When even an innocuous appreciative but not lecherly comment comment like "nice dress" on the one day a co-worker wears something particularly attractive is deemed sexual harassment, the movement has gone too far.
Yeah, yeah, keep pointing to the exceptions and strive to make people believe that ALL athletes/VC execs/geeks are sexual predators.
Re:Many men feel emboldened now that Trump (Score:5, Insightful)
When even an innocuous appreciative but not lecherly comment comment like "nice dress" on the one day a co-worker wears something particularly attractive is deemed sexual harassment, the movement has gone too far.
Whether that's harassment depends. Do you also compliment your male co-workers when they dress nicely? If your female co-worker indicates that she's uncomfortable with the compliment (even non-verbally), do you stop saying such things?
I can and do indeed compliment my co-workers appearance whether male or female and without fear of overbearing PC considerations, but then I've been living in France for 30 years. The bullshit where it's not what you say but how someone chooses to hear it never took root here, thankfully.
Does that mean that I can be a knuckledragging cad with my comments? No and there are penalties here for true harassment -- but not for the overbearing PC workplace environment that has become prevalent in the U.S. and that is mocked by my co-workers both male and female. As I'm the only American this and other American excesses come up regularly.
If the answers to either of those questions is "no", then yes, it's harassment, and that has nothing to do with any "movement".
How amusing that you're so deep inside the PC police state that you cannot even see it. Innocuous comments and even more so, an off color remark is only harassment and sufficient cause for a lawsuit in the U.S & less so in the U.K. Here, the PC gender police do not have the upper hand so it needs to be much more systematic.
I've counselled a few co-workers through some harassment. For one, a co-worker with whom innocent flirting was second nature (& a joy to be around) was harassed by a knuckledragger who refused to accept that flirting!=desire that his continued hitting on her and increasingly explicit sexual innuendos were unwanted which led to his spreading rumours that she was sleeping around. THAT was harassment & I'm proud to say that he lost his job in part thanks to my testimony.
Oh yeah but you go ahead and label "nice dress" harassment... If it wasn't so sad, it'd be funny.
Re: (Score:2)
Yyyeeeaaahhh because men NEVER EVER EVER spoke up for themselves before Trump. Riiiiiiiiight.
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's not the way it works. A troll which is called out as a troll does not get to claim said response constitutes a success. Only a response which does not acknowledge the trollish nature of a post constitutes a successful troll. You can't just declare yourself a winner, there are rules, and you're not Charlie Sheen.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't work like that. I can give you some lessons if you want. Lesson one: you just responded to my troll, therefore, I won. See how that works? That'll be tree fiddy.
Re: "not my job to make you all feel good" (Score:5, Informative)
First of all, no it's not.
The job of a CEO is to increase shareholder earnings
No, it's not. There may not be any shareholders, or the shareholders may be the employees, but even assuming it's a publicly traded company with a capitalist charter, it's not. Selling all assets and allotting all proceeds as dividends would immensely increase the shareholder earnings. Investing anything in research will always reduce shareholder earnings with no guarantee of later increased earnings.
The CEOs job is to execute on the visions of the owners or board of directors. That might mean spending money to increase the chance of long term survival at the cost of short and medium term profits.
Or it might mean building a hugely expensive new head offices, because that's the vision of the board.
Re: (Score:2)
This particular CEO appears to have had a public drunken meltdown. Which certainly sends a very bad signal to the shareholder, leading to the offer to resign.